Reviewed by: The Letter to the Colossians by Scot McKnight Nijay K. Gupta scot mcknight, The Letter to the Colossians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018). Pp. lx + 442. $55. This new commentary by Scot McKnight is written for pastors. The NICNT series as a whole expressly aims to explain and interpret NT books in the service of the church, and McK. has a long history of writing theological books related to Christian leadership, ecclesiology, and mission. This is important to know, because this Colossians commentary, while engaging with myriad academic works, always keeps this audience and purpose in mind. Indeed, this is the most theologically oriented Colossians commentary I have ever read. In terms of what Colossians is all about, M. argues that Paul offers "a comprehensive vision of life under King Jesus" (p. 2). In the introduction, M. treats all the expected prolegomena, but I will briefly mention his views on authorship and the letter's opponents. On the first matter, McK. contests the notion that we can begin with a "pure" Paul in the undisputed letters against which to compare Colossians. Given Paul's regular practice of coauthoring and his use of professional secretaries—and that these "other voices" change sometimes from one situation to the next—claims to pseudonymity/allonymity become extremely complex. Ultimately, McK. believes that there is no reason to suspect that Paul was not "behind" the letter; that is, there is nothing particularly un-Pauline theologically, especially when we take into account the natural development of his thinking over time. I also tentatively argue in favor of authenticity in my own Colossians commentary (Nijay K. Gupta, Colossians [Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary; Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2013]), but I wonder what McK. would say about 2 Peter, since neither Petrine letter mentions cowriters. Was this unique to Paul? What role did cowriters actually play in construction and composition (and how do we know)? And what about the exact roles of secretaries? McK. tentatively argues in favor of a date of 55–57 c.e. with Paul in an Ephesian imprisonment. On the matter of local opponents and false teaching, McK. refers to these as "Halakic Mystics" or "Torah-shaped transcendentalists" (p. 32). He explains that we can glean from Colossians information that points to a teaching that comes out of a form of Judaism that was dualistic (probably from some Hellenistic influence), mystical and cosmological, and ascetic. In some way this teaching undermined Paul's christology. Space permits attention to only two key texts in the commentary proper. Regarding the so-called Colossian hymn (1:15-20), McK. sees no clear evidence that it was pre-Pauline or that it ought to be considered formally a "hymn." He reads it especially in light of Jewish traditions. Paul's focus here is on Christ's supremacy in creation (vv. 15-17) and redemption (vv. 18-20). McK. notes that this passage would have been rather shocking to its readers, as Paul argues that the created order finds ultimate peace in "the ignominy of a bloody act of execution at the hands of violent Romans, an act God unzipped and reconfigured by raising his Son from among the dead" (p. 167). Another controversial Colossian text is the so-called household code (3:18–4:1), to which McK. gives ample attention. He sees this as an expansion or illustration of what it means to do all things in the name of the Lord (3:17; see p. 335). Scholars have long wondered how Paul's code relates to ancient conversations about household order. McK. finds Paul's discussion related in structure but unprecedented in its expression and ideology. This passage is not accommodationist. It is not about fitting into Roman society but about how [End Page 549] to "live out the gospel in the world" (p. 340). The burden is not on inferior members of a social pairing submitting (as with traditional Greco-Roman codes) but on all believers, in all situations, orienting themselves toward the Lordship of Christ (and not Caesar or anyone else) (p. 344). McK. clearly expresses that Paul did not overtly challenge the patriarchy of his time, but the message of his household...